Category: Training & Development

It is assumed that once we have delivered the information to our students and trainees that they are ready to put them to use. Are students and trainees learning what we want them to and applying that learning when they should? The answer is a resounding, “No!”

I was astounded a few years ago when I taught at the United States Air Force Academy at a seminar on learning that students and trainees don’t really apply the information we convey–no matter how important or life saving it is–for about two years hence. That’s how long experts say it takes for the information to sink in.

I thought it was an interesting fact at the time, but as a trainer and a professor of students in an intense environment now where performance is everything I find I am more concerned. Call it a maturity issue on my part earlier, if you will, but at the time I was more concerned that some instructors at the Academy and other fine institutions thought the study seemed to exclude them.

Quite the contrary, it was exactly the institutions that have a rigid framework found not only in a training environment, but in exclusive private schools, fundamentally religious-based institutions, or any institution or environment that prides itself on imparting values and character. That includes all the service academies, Ivy league and other prestigious institutions, regardless of academic prowess. That is not to say these insitutions do not offer a fantastic, even superior learning experiences. The question is not really academic, but behavioral.

Somehow the less prestigious, less rigid, less fundamental schools did not see the same significance in the study. Their students, in fact, were more practically bent and ready to work. Who could know? But let’s learn from it.

Of course, there are always exceptions, and it may be more important in one field where knowledge is more important than practical application. However, when flying jets split-second decisions must be made on practical application of what is learned and lives are at stake. That’s different. Not all practical application comes to that, but when a company needs someone to apply practical application on its behalf it’s important; it is certainly better than having someone sitting at a desk for two years until it dawns on them what is expected of them–or not. It does not work either.

I don’t have the details of the exact study and I apologize for that, but I can assure it was quite valid and backed up by evidence. It was a long time ago and I don’t think things have changed that much. We certainly aren’t seeing the results in rising productivity levels.

Granted, this is a blog–not an expose of teaching and higher education, but the information is worth pondering about for a solution. Maybe that is reason enough to incorporate practical application and real life scenarios into our training and learning environments. We do that now. Are we doing it enough? Do we monitor education and training throughout the first two years of a job? Not often. It cost too much. Internships help. Especially with a wise interpreter to take student to be the employee the company wants them to be.

Of course, an easier solution would be to wait two years to hire anyone from the those kinds of institutions. I can hear the groans from here. I’m not serious. We can’t do that.

This study, surprisingly enough, did not say this was the case with institutions of lesser prestige, or those that seemed more practically based–filling the education and training void for the immediate workplace. That kind of institution does attract a different kind of student–one looking to change his or her life for the better. a practical view of education and training. On the downside, it is their very background that makes them less productive or dedicated students; however, those that do well seemed to succeed at work. And, education for education sake has its place; I won’t deny it.

Ask yourself why that experience might be different for the students or trainees. We know that it is a maturity issue and can assume a relative carefree attitude of student life can contribute to not having the foresight needed for future success. All students have issues, rich or poor, so we can eliminate that factor; however, focus directed in the right direction matters. Priorities, too. I’m not suggesting students shouldn’t have priorities elsewhere besides leading toward success, but those will be the ones first in line. It’s not a perfect theory.

Yes sir, that education or that training is the ticket. All of my USAF academy students would be engineers and most pilots–some flying fighters and some going into the space program–and a few going on to graduate school to be scientists, lawyers and doctors. They are guaranteed jobs. That senior year is a little lax to say the least.

I was one of the working students all through my undergraduate education at a less than prestigious institution; however, the Air Force paid my way for most of my graduate work. I was paid a salary and the service paid for books and tuition. I found myself, for the first time in my life without survival issues while going to school.

I was essentially in the same situation as students who can pick their schools, have enough money to socialize and enjoy the campus environment, and the result: my grades were better before when I worked full time, lost sleep and social playtime. Perhaps, for me it was a matter of my focus. For others, having that opportunity meant a relief from the stress of having to worry about survival, and the result entirely different. My point is that it makes a difference always, and it is behavioral in nature. The human factor.

However, my concern and yours should be those that are just graduating and going directly into a job. At the time I was teaching at the Academy some students were put on hold in the Reserves, giving them time to process what they learned and apply. Is it critical in today’s society? Probably in some cases, but I suspect the numbers are so small, they are chalked up to training accidents, misfits, personal issues, or some other reason for failure to use what they learned in school.

Understand that I am not singling out the the U.S. Air Force or any other service school, or any other Ivy league or well-known private school. Any service school, and prestigious private and/or any Ivy league school practically guarantee placement through name alone and alums willing to sponsor. That, of course, is part of the appeal. Not to mention the fact having staff and personnel from those schools makes a company look good.

What can we do as trainers and developers? We start doing our job from the hiring process. Maybe even a little before, if we can insinuate our presence into the schools to let them know how a transition to work will take place. Gone should be the quick and dirty introduction, and you start next week. Or, “Here’s your guide,” another employee with time on his hands. Or, “It’s all online, you’ll get it.” Or, as happened to me once, “Here’s your Bible (not a religious reference), your how-to-do the job. Show me what you can do.”

We can’t not care because we can let go those who don’t perform. We stand the risk of losing some potentially valuable employees because they can’t help where they come from. Interns should learn from the best we have. If there ever is a time for working mentors–mentors that lead and teach as we need them to; the time is now. They say you learn best by teaching. Why not bring new employees into training to train others? It’s a wild perspective, I know. But we learn best when we train others what is expected. That interaction can’t be bad.

Well, I guess I awoke on that side of the bed today as I contemplate getting into hybrid teaching–a new job myself and my learning was a long time ago. Fortunately, I have applied that learning since, and consider I am always learning. Some of it will be new. The technology and technique didn’t exist then. That will be new. Exciting, I hope. My goal will be to teach the practical. How to use what we learn and why it is important. Hopefully, I will succeed.

For now, let’s blog about learning and its immediate practical application, talk about it, live it as part of how we train. It may be the Cave Man in me again, looking toward simple changes in the way we operate. I follow the trends of technology as much as the next guy but I think about the non-technical side of us all the time–the people we train and teach. Technology is a tool–a good tool. Paper is a tool. Humans are not.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Enough for now. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. I don’t have all the answers, but I try to put them in different terms like everyone else. Hopefully, my ideas are worth thinking about, jog your memory, make you think of something else we can do to do our jobs better. By all means, feel free to disagree and let me know about it. Offer yourself as guest blogger. I don’t have the lock on ideas. My website is still there where more ideas await the curious–waiting for you. Happy training.

We all seem to have answers for success, but they aren’t the same. Are there stereotypes of success? It’s not just about training stereotypes for success: that is people who look and act like us and have the same education and training. It’s a start, but there’s more.

As trainers, it is important for us to think about what it is our companies want to gain from our trainees. Maybe we should be training the keys of success. What does make someone a success in a company? It varies, but some things remain the same. How do we gauge success? If we understood that, then maybe the hiring process gets a little easier, productivity better, personnel issues better understood. Is it simple communication?

Basic communication should, of course, make the cut of being able to communicate what needs to be said and understood by another party. It makes sense in this country that most people can understand one another pretty well; however, we do have our issues. Because we have a large number of Spanish-speaking people does that mean our company has to accommodate them. In Quebec, acceptance its bi-lingual nature is the law; that is not the case here in America–not yet. So, a non-English speaker can expect for that to be a handicap, initially; however, there are environments, even in the U.S. where that is a plus, not a negative.

Probably the first thing the Cave Man did was try to understand the language of other tribes after spending a good deal of time trying to kill all those who were different. Eventually, he came to realize if he wanted to learn from these strange people, he had to understand them and language was the best way. We do it today–or at least we try to make ourselves understood, realizing many may not understand our language.

For example, we say on the phone click one number for English and another for Spanish. A least we will speak the language–sort of. But in other situations if we use big words or slang the other person doesn’t understand, have we accomplished communication. Have we offended either party with this conversation that is marginally understood?

I’m going to look at communication, language, education and training success based on our use of language, and in my own Cave Man basic way try to make some sense of it.

Now, let’s assume we speak the same language. Does that always mean we are successful? I saw an interesting article, the Best Kept Secrets of Successful Business People, but found many of its ideas fit anyone who seeks success. Xianhang Zhang says, “If you feel like you’re the smartest guy in a room, that’s probably because someone is fleecing you.” Too often students listen to others and feel the way to success is to get the diploma, but it’s always more than that. We know the diploma may get you in the door; it may even get you hired, but it will not guarantee you success.

And, this happens to trainees, too. “I’ve got the education or training now so promote me.” How many times have we heard the term “proven success?” It seems sometimes workers don’t hear it. That means a track record of accomplishments. Training and education is one thing–accomplishments another. Success is not a simple matter.

With education and training, it is important to apply it. It is almost a no brainer to most of us who sit in observation. You can be booksmart, but not have the character to use it. With common sense you go into the education or training with the idea of what’s in it for me? What can I do with this information? Every piece of learning can be connected to a practical issue. If you aren’t connecting it to something you can do with it, you are connecting it to something you have done with it in the past. The result either way is a practical connection.

Want to know why most people don’t get the jobs they apply for? I has nothing to do with race or other obvious or often thought of stereotypical attributes. It’s because they look good on paper, but in person they lack something very important–a confidence and knowledge of application. A company doesn’t want to know if you have the knowledge but can you apply it; HR wants to know if you have the knowledge to separate you from those who admit they don’t. The company wants to know if you’ll be able to use what you know to their benefit. At this point, they really don’t care about you. Later that may change after you have proven yourself.

So being the smartest guy in the room doesn’t make you the most marketable. Now the company has hired the “smartest guy” in the room, they want to know, not only are you capable of applying that knowledge, but if you will fit into a company that has people who know what you do and apply. Surprise! You may not be the smartest guy in the room right now after all.

Businessman Frank E. Rider makes some some simple but sensible points:

• Work Hard
• Be Smart
• Be Lucky

“By ‘Work Hard’ I don’t mean lift heavy boxes or work 80 hours a week. Do the things that are hard, the things you don’t understand or don’t want to do. Do the hard things.

“By ‘Be Smart’ I don’t mean be Einstein. The first rule of being smart is “don’t be dumb.” Think things through, be street smart, get at least one good nugget from every person you come in contact with. Behind every successful businessman/woman there are several thousand people (mentors, advisors, peers, competitors, employees, customers, vendors etc.) The human wiki.

“Don’t leave out luck. It’s a state of mind. Working hard and being smart will put you in position to take advantage of luck when it presents itself.”

So what distinguishes you? Character. Leadership. The ability to get along with others. The ability to leave your ego at home. Attitude is key to fitting in. Being the stereotype.

Fitting in. It doesn’t mean changing yourself until you are unnoticeable. Are you so shallow that if you can’t speak the way you always do, that means your less than yourself. We like people who speak other languages. Successful people speak a company language–usually a standard English (unless you have a job with a foreign company) so we speak the most common language of our customers.

If we do something more individual in nature like use “street talk” or “slang,” we may be cool but we don’t speak for the company. If this is too much of a challenge, you should look for another job where that language is appropriate. I don’t know many like that. At least not ones that pay well or are legal. You see these companies don’t care, and the products are in so much demand by an unsophisticated public.

Ax yo’self whad it means. Insulted that I should assume you speak that way. Insulted I should assume anything about you. That is exactly the point. We shouldn’t have any reason to assume anything about you. At first, language used in such a way my be charming; its certainly individual, but it will lose the respect of those you serve. Company speak, notice I did not call it standard English, is not as interesting.

It is assumed by people of color (to use their own term of acceptance here) that someone is a hiring person is prejudiced by race or color. Experience tells them you have certain attitudes and speak to customers in a certain way if the interview does not bring out the opposite. If you are well spoken in company speak, that fact will be ignored by most. I will admit a few prejudiced souls are still out there, but try dressing like the company and acting like the company and you most likely will fit in.

If you do not get the job, look at your other qualifications, education, work history, availability, and general attractiveness. The last is actually one of the more significant, unspoken rules of business. Image of company is everything. Short people beware except in a petite shop. Tall, good-looking people rule; product knowledge and procedures can be taught, while genetics are what they are. We have laws that prevent overt prejudice, but older people don’t apply to a younger company that sells to a young clientele either and vice versa. Certain businesses seek young female sales persons because the clietele is largely female. Seen very many males work at Victoria’s Secret, and some seek men to talk to businesses who have predominately male customers, i.e. John Deer.

Often the world deals in stereotypes. Being a stereotype also means you fit in to an expected norm. So much so, take one look at theatre or film and you’ll see it full of stereotypes so much so it’s news when someone breaks that barrier. Take Denzel Washington. Like many African American actors, he could have allowed himself to be stereotyped and indeed he was until he first rose to prominence when he joined the cast of the medical drama St. Elsewhere, playing Dr. Philip Chandler for six years. That made a wider range of people take notice; however, early one he had to accept that stereotype and change it–for himself anyway. Later we see him the hero. He is well spoken and when he puts on the hood vernacular we are somewhat surprised. Success is based on changing up that stereotype.

All things being equal in theatre, an actor can lose a part to another who is more stereotypically the part, all talent being equal. It’s the same in the real world. Stereotypes stay what they are if you let them. There are stereotypes as long as we reinforce them. But you can change them by broadening their focus. Some actors love stereotypes–that is, if it gets them a lot of work. Take the actors who have dark features: they can play, Native Americans, Spanish, South or Central American, North African, Arab or Muslim, and sometimes Eastern European or even Indian or Pakistani. I’m a blond, which has limited me to particular parts, California, Irish, German, Danish, etc., however, if I tried to convince others I could play ethnic roles I would be disappointed. There are two many who already fit that stereotype so why waste time with me. In Hollywood, in the past, those same characters would have been played by a caucasian actor of note, i.e., a very bad John Wayne as Ghengis Khan, and, we scoffed. But Hollywood was made to take the ethnic because the audience (and the union) demanded it, but the experience was better all around. These actors accepted the fact that they were a stereotype in one way, but still had to fit into the company. Speaking only one way would have limited them severely.

Perseverance is what has made these character actors successful. Not only persistence in getting what they wanted, they listened to what was being said and noted the trends. They fit themselves into the trends. This is idea is not new. Ever hear of the man of a thousand faces? There is actually an old movie about Lon Chaney, a horror film star you may have hear about. The film starred James Cagney, another actor, who certainly didn’t fill the stereotype of tall, good-looking, but he played this role of an actor who wanted to work so bad that he disguised himself into whatever the film company was looking for, and got the part, proving that anything is possible if you try to fit in. Lon Chaney became the “man of a thousand faces” setting the standards for the movie industry to use people who were good actors to play parts they may not fit physically and use make-up, costumes and special effects to create the whole effect. Attitude, perseverence, using the ego to motivate or persevere, but do not wait for success, make it happen is the way to do.

By the way, there are may theories on success, read them, contemplate them, apply them if they fit. Don’t try to be the first to apply your own theory, you may not even get the job. You’ll have a lot of people during it their way; do you really think they want you working against them. Fit in with them and use your way if it brings you success, but only then. Use it before, unless you work for yourself, and you won’t fit in. We like being individuals, but the world is made of people who live together, and they can’t help putting stereotypes to their world. If you want to be like them, you have to a stereotype with a difference but still one they appreciate.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

I always remind folks that this is my opinion and I hold no one else responsible for the way my mind works. But I am open and been known to change my mind for another point of view. We are all learners here. This a long blog or article even for me. If you are interested in hearing some of my other views, check out my website under the category of What I Say. Be sure to check out my new book onThe Cave Man Guide to Training and Development and look for my second, The Cave Man Guide to Communication coming soon. Happy training.

It’s no joking matter. Moderation and facilitation at a conference or meeting are serious business, and remain among the best methods to gather and discuss information in a meaningful way. It is a way of organizing specific information productively as well. Facilitating and moderating are part of the trainer’s most important tools.

At first glance, the moderator’s job doesn’t seem all that scary. “I’ll be doing what I always do at meetings and these are my colleagues, too.” A good idea, but it’s not the same; and prospective moderators or facilitators need to be made aware of that. There are differences, according to most experts.

Still, some organizations may use the terms interchangeably, which doesn’t help. You have to wonder if the organizations know what they want. Hopefully, they have their own definitions and stick to them for consistency. And, I have mine. I’m in the camp that sees differences. I suppose, as long as you know the job, it doesn’t matter what it’s called–except in a medium like this where communication needs a broad spectrum for clarity.

The moderator’s job depends more on his or her personal knowledge of the subject to lead and direct others along more information-rich, specific issues. A moderator in contrast to a facilitator is much more in tune with the nuances of the subject. Differences matter here.

The facilitator may be someone who does not have the same knowledge base as the others, but is experienced at organizing material and soliciting the responses from the group. A facilitator is perceived as being a leader of the discussion to set the tone and bring in all manner of diversity to have a fruitful discussion. To do this job, a person has to be more of a trained communicator and less of a subject matter expert–someone comfortable in handling the environment.

It should be no surprise to learn the government and other non-profit organizations may not be thinking about communication in the same way a company does that deals with sales of products or services.

Too often, (and I’ve seen this a lot in government), people are given moderator or facilitator jobs because they seem appropriate to their level of position. While these people may not be the subject matter or communication experts, they are placed in a position to lead the discussion on a particular topic. It may go with the territory as “the way we do things in this office.” It’s not necessarily a good way to go, I’ll grant you, but government and other non-profit organizations can be very rank and position conscious. Only when people have to sell those programs are they aware of how complex dynamic communication can be when transferred to a more formal environment such as a seminar or conference.

Good communication (facilitation) may appear to the observer to be just “a matter of conversation with peers.” However, it isn’t just “a matter of conversation;” it involves many more skills that require knowledge, training and practice. It looks easy, but it’s not. It may be that this one type of communication, facilitation or moderation, seems natural and the other (public speaking) not so much.

Facilitating is outwardly more dynamic and focused on both subject and audience, bringing out the most diverse view possible, whereas moderating looks to consolidate and merge views toward a common goal.

A manager can be a good facilitator and, if he or she has a good working knowledge on the specific subject, a good moderator only if he or she is able to separate from being the manager of subject-matter experts and become a communicator and information flow expert.

Check out the Free Management Library page: All About Facilitation, Group Skills and Group Performance Management for more useful information. For the most part, facilitation and moderation are found under a heading of leadership; however, I think both can fall as strongly under the heading of communication in the same way a leader is not perceived as a leader unless he or she is able to communicate that fact. Facilitation and moderation involves complex communication centered on business and organizational management.

Body Language
Coaching
Conflict (Interpersonal)
Feedback (Sharing)
Handling Difficult People
Listening
Morale (Boosting)
Motivating
Negotiating
Power and Influence (Managing)
Presenting
Questioning
Trust (Building)
Valuing Diversity

To be fair, while I think subject matter experts should also be communicators, not all communicators can be subject matter experts. There are times when you need someone with enough knowledge on a subject to be able to move people who have similarly well-developed knowledge on the subject to relevant discussion and action.

Nadejda Loumbeva is an international organization professional working in managing of knowledge using information and communication technologies, and all aspects of organizational development. Here’s what she thinks on the subject from her blog.

Moderation:

In my view, moderation of meetings, events, networks and communities, focuses on keeping the information and communication flow clear and accessible to all who participate, at all times. In this sense, the moderator is at least in some ways an information manager. In an online environment, s/he monitors the communication flow, makes summaries and digests, approves participants’ requests and posts, and even maintains the online environment. The moderator is often quite invisible for those who participate in meetings, events and communities, but nevertheless indispensable!

Facilitation:

To the contrary, the facilitator of meetings, events, networks and communities is much more visible and active. S/he steers the communication flow and keeps it on track. In this way, facilitation focuses on including all participants in the discussion, even the ones who are less comfortable with speaking and contributing, ensuring all voices are heard and discussion is vibrant, interesting and useful to those who participate. The facilitator makes it clear to all when milestones as part of the meeting, event, or network/community activity, have been achieved and then moves on to the next milestone. Having good people skills, the facilitator enables a comfortable and inclusive environment of openness and trust for those who participate.

Ms. Loumbeva has a solid yet brief definition I can work with. Keeping the communication simple is always key. We know most people are uncomfortable with public speaking, and on the surface this does not seem like public speaking. In fact, facilitating or moderating a public discussion involves more than public speaking; it involves leadership traits and organizational skills as the “script” changes moment-to-moment.

You still have to know the basics of good communication and apply them. You have to know your audience (and participants in this case), know your subject and know yourself. Most importantly you have to own the stage and control the environment.

When you are a public speaker you own the stage but there is little you can do at the moment to control the environment. When I first started public speaking, I was nervous. I hardly notice it now that I own the stage when I come out. But the same holds true for anyone in any speaking environment. If you have been asked to contribute, you need to “own the stage.” Do that and the nervousness will go away in time–or be channeled in a useful way.

As for controlling the environment? That can be trained. You have to understand the dynamics of interpersonal communication as well as public communication to be successful as a moderator or facilitator. It is a worthwhile experience to have as a communicator and as a trainer. To some, it may even be more satisfying than public speaking alone–especially for those who enjoy the feeling of immediate accomplishment.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

In my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development, I talk about how the idea of training and development began in the cave, how we learned what we know today from the cave men and women who were motivated by survival. Only our organization’s survival is at stake today, not our lives. Imagine what problem solving facilitation and moderation might have looked like in the cave council. The only difference would be the campfires to keep the cave warm. Facilitation and moderation had to evolve from the chaos of everyone wanting to be heard. At first, the head of the cave clan or tribe probably ran the program until he or she decided someone else could do the job better, and the first facilitator or moderator was born.

If you would like to respond to my views, please do so here. I can also be found on my website. There you will also find articles on other subjects under the What I Say category. Let me know if I can help with your next training session, coach you through your next keynote, or anything else training or communication-related. Happy training.

Taking advantage of technology, a teacher in Potomac, Maryland conducts her Advanced Placement Calculus class a little differently. In fact she has turned the traditional method on its head by having her students view her lectures via podcast and bring their homework to school. This has phenomenal applications for experiential training.

According to Gregg Toppo of USA Today in his article, “Flipped Classrooms Take Advantage of Technology,” students are less stressed and teachers lecture less–or so it seems – and teach more. It’s the latest way technology is changing teachers’ jobs — in this case it’s literally turning their workday upside-down. But teachers say flipped, or upside-down, classes offer greater control of material and more face time with students.”

The Method:

The teacher (in this case, Stacey Roshan) records her lesson on her tablet using it as virtual blackboard and uploads it to ITunes as a podcast. Students view the podcast at their convenience, once or as many times as needed. When they come to class, they bring out what would traditionally be “homework” to work on in class, first by themselves, then with a fellow student, and finally with the teacher. If something wasn’t clear in the lecture, time can be taken now to clarify it. Time is not wasted on what was easily digested and understood, but on the areas that plagued the students, and contacting a peer or problem solving didn’t resolve. It seems a wonderful application of hands-on experiential learning.

The Arguments:

The Cons. Disadvantaged students don’t have access to the technology, or what they have is unreliable. That sentiment was echoed in the comment section as well, also pointing out that “again we’re proving anything works for top tier students.” The technology becomes the focus, not the lesson. Lecture is still lecture however leisurely its delivered, and not the best way to teach; “it is still bad pedagogy,” say one detractor. Interactive lecture in class is better, constantly checking on the student’s grasp by asking questions as you go.

The Pros. On the plus side, according to Toppo, the teacher, Roshan “says it’s all about helping students understand difficult material. Flipping the classroom, she says, has made her students more independent, less-stressed learners, because for many students, the hardest part is applying the lesson to problem sets.” It also offers the students more face-time with the teacher.

The Training Application:

The idea of experiential training is nothing new to trainers, and neither is idea of passing out “lecture” materials to trainees and having them review them and bring (homework) to class to work on in teams or alone with instructor guidance. Also, although personally I haven’t seen it yet with the corporate universities, I can’t imagine it isn’t part of their curriculum. The idea, of course, is the hands-on approach to problem solving, and the kinetic approach to learning. In simple terms, we learn best by doing.

Similar to this approach is the hybrid education I have mentioned previously here in, “Are Hybrid Online/ Classrooms the Answer?” In fact, hybrid education and training seems to be the future, with so little time being available in today’s fast-paced world. The very technology making some things easier for us is also making us work harder because we are constantly available and answers can be researched and delivered in a matter of minutes instead of hours and days.

By the way, I will soon be teaching two hybrid public speaking classes, and I suspect during and after that experience I may have more to report on the subject of hybrid learning and its applicability to training and development. So far, I am very intrigued by this approach and can’t wait to start my learning process. Two different audiences, two different environments and the same class and teacher may make for an interesting discussion at some point.

What are your thoughts on experiential learning and the “flipped classroom” scenario? Do you see any applicable training applications? Give us some examples of techniques you’ve used in your training. Let me know in the comments section here. Also, if you want to contact me or check out my Acting Smarts website feel free. I have a new eBook out for anyone interested in my Cave Man approach to training, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. It includes a lot of helpful ideas and insights for all levels of trainers. Happy training.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

It’s not rocket science, but I am talking about training to reach the stars. Forgive the pun and the cliche, but they seem most appropriate here.

Can we do it? Of course, we can. I learned all I know from the Cave Man who must have said, “I need to fix this. I have no other choice,” and Bob the Builder who reminded me and my children every day, “Can we fix it? Yes, we can.”

How to get people to reach for the stars? Isn’t it simply another way of saying, “Set high goals and be determined to reach them?”

How do we get people to dream big and reach high?

Besides trying to change company attitudes, we can ensure we reward initiative and new ideas, that we make brainstorming work as intended, that we facilitate to the best of our ability to be all-inclusive and letting everyone be heard, and most importantly, that we don’t put anyone down as having an unworkable idea or an idea too lofty. Hence: we reach for the stars.

Steve Jobs‘ untimely death is in the news now, and I’m sure we’ll be thinking about him for a long time as we learn even more about his accomplishments in the coming days. He was an underachiever in education, and he was pushed out of his own company; however, he was an overachiever in goals we may have thought impossible. His accomplishments are vast. I’ve heard it put, “He was the Einstein of Technology.” He certainly changed the world.

His lack of education and “failed” experience might have kept him out of a traditional job, but it was his achievements–his accomplishments that overcame his “disadvantages.”

So can you. By all means get all the education and positive job experience you can, but the career experts today say to write your resume as a series of accomplishments rather than a series of job descriptions. My resume is a combination, but if I’m trying to sell myself as a product I have to say what I’m good for. My accomplishments are examples of those attributes.

How can we go about training people to reach for the stars–no matter their education or experience?

It never stopped Jobs. Yes, we could argue that he was different. Perhaps, in his mind, there was nothing that couldn’t be accomplished, nothing that couldn’t be made to work if it was useful. He believed in himself. Pushed out of the company he started, Apple’s Macintosh company, he went to Pixar, and his accomplishments may have had something to do with Apple’s buying of Pixar and bringing him back to serve as its CEO. We may never know the whole story there. Admittedly, people say he was a genius and how can we possibly think our accomplishments can be as magnificent as his. We can’t. Our accomplishments will be our own.

How do we train people to be so motivated to take the initiative?

It all began with Bob the Builder. Anyone with kids knows who I am talking about. Or, the Little Engine That Could. Children stories that tell us we can do anything we set our minds to do–if we only try. A bit sophomoric, I agree, but true. We did learn a lot in kindergarten, but we forgot it as we got older as other people told us what we needed to do to succeed in the job. They were very specific in their instruction and they weren’t wrong either. Sure, we aren’t children, but last time I checked we were still human with personal dreams.

Our dreams include our careers; we want to succeed. The message from any organization should be clear: If you help the organization succeed, you will succeed. Business as usual means we aren’t moving forward. It’s new, fresh ideas that move us forward. It was a new idea that got us started and we need an influx of new ideas to maintain our success.

How do you train people to show initiative?

You encourage and reward it. Never pooh-pooh an idea. Ideas are creations. If you are a religious person, pooh-poohing could be considered sinful. Instead, how about acknowledging it and letting it cogitate for awhile in as many minds that want to engage it. Somewhere there may come a spark, another idea that makes it applicable, affordable, politically agreeable–the opposite of your assumptions–the very reasons for “pooh-poohing” the idea in the first place.

We like to say we brainstorm, but we violate those rules by setting limits; let’s make sure that doesn’t happen. Have fun with it. There’s more to be gained with the free flow of ideas making the work place fun. Positive people make positive things happen. Reward initiative rather than slap it down when it doesn’t meet the “way we’ve always done it.” Learn to despise that attitude.

People are motivated by moving forward.

It doesn’t always have to mean promotion, but a step that says I’m a valuable participant and every idea that contributes to company success rightly deserves to be called an accomplishment. List those accomplishments and you have a sales package that says you are deserving of reaching the stars.

Remember, Bob the Builder’s famous words, “Can we fix it. Yes, we can.”

And, the Little Engine That Could, did.

My last two posts addressed A Look at the Education vs Experience Debate and To Be Eliminated or Not, That is The Question, which focused on eliminating job applicants. I did not talk about accomplishments in those posts, but they are clearly what makes a valued employee. Accomplishments means someone is a someone you want on your team–that is if you want a dynamic, productive team.

The initial screening of applicants may mean you probably won’t get an interview if you don’t have the prerequisite education and experience. However, if the screeners review a good cover letter or resume anyway and it includes a series of accomplishments you may overcome that barrier. Personally, I like brief one-liners to highlight my accomplishments, then I can expound on them later in the interview when asked.

We know “fit” has a lot to do with getting the job and may indeed be a part of the screening process. A lot is said about giving the company exactly what they asked for so they can check off your qualifications. That may be part of how they determine “fit.”

Accomplishments that demonstrate hard work, perseverance, creativity and initiative are what corporations, small businesses, non-profits, and even government should be about. Instead of listing a job description and all the routine duties performed, include your accomplishments in the position, and you’ll have a stronger resume, too.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Please feel free to subscribe or RSS to my articles. I promise to be unique in my approach. I call it my Cave Man approach–a common sense guide to training and development. You’ll find more on my website. I’m open for business–not only training, but also speaking engagements, executive speech and presentations coaching as well as training development. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.

It is relatively easy to test information learned in a classroom or from a book. But can you accurately assess if that knowledge can and will be applied in a practical sense?

While information can be remembered in the short term, its not nearly so simple to determine its application to the real world and its practical value. Quite simply, its effectiveness cannot be measured in the same amount of time.

Information retained in the short term is fine for education; for starters, it connects the dots elsewhere in the coursework. So, it’s fine for the student.

For the employee in training, his training manager, or his supervisor; however, testing information is not enough. Application of that knowledge is important, too. How can we ensure that the people we train apply the information we give them? What may be enough is the subject of this article.

From his article in the Sloan MIT Management Review, Lessons Learned, Harold J. Martin says that some studies suggest “that just 10% to 40% of training is ever used on the job,” and “it is clear that a big chunk of the tens of billions of dollars organizations spend annually on staff development is going down the drain.”

How do we really assess training?

Tests and evaluations are not the total answer, yet that is the way we’ve done business for years. Organizations would love to have a way to guarantee what their employees learn in training can and will be applied on the job. We can’t guarantee it for good reasons too numerous to mention, most having to do with whole of human behavior; however we can try. We know the training process. Once training needs have been assessed, then comes the training, but the real value to the organization is the training assessment; it is the result we have all been waiting for. I’m not just talking about the evaluation of training that employees fill out after the training either, although it does have some value. Is it a question of measurement? Can the amount of information learned be measured? Yes, in the short term. A simple test. Enough? No. Practical application? Not really, but we can help.

How can we measure or ensure the actual amount of learning that takes place can be applied?

It’s easy to say in an evaluation form just what the company trainer wants to hear. It’s called “experimenter bias” in psychology. It simply means people have a tendency to give you what you want, rather than the honest answer. Not that they are lying, but they may honestly believe they have assimilated the information and can apply it. Especially after you have reminded them of the company training objectives time and time again throughout the training.

Now look at those objectives and the messages it sends to the trainees. It says the obvious: “This is what I (or we) hope to accomplish today or this week.” It also says, “This is what is expected of me.” Or, “Let’s just get on with it. I’ll give the instructor or trainer what they expect and I won’t have to elaborate.” Maybe, “I don’t understand this. I don’t dare tell anyone because I’ll lose my job or be demoted, so I’ll just say everything’s fine.”

This is the unspoken back story, if you will, of an employee who needs this training and has to succeed. Left to him or her, he or she will indeed succeed, regardless of what you do as the trainer. It may not be a conscious thought on the trainee’s part, but it is a part of the complex brain function we all have that evaluates and uses all the information we receive, and does with it what is best for us. Hide it, ignore it, or express it.

Martin also says, “Chalk some of it up to human nature: Training involves change, and change creates anxiety that people seek to avoid. In other cases, old habits and workplace pressures can break down even the strongest resolve to use newly acquired skills and knowledge.”

He recommends some simple activities that can significantly increase the amount of learning that is transferred to the workplace. Here’s the snapshot:

1. Write down how the information will be applied
2. Measure results
3. Hold peer meetings
4. Ensure supportive superiors
5. Provide employee access to experts

He also says, “Based on the experiences of a large Midwestern manufacturer and an industrial supplier, follow-up doesn’t have to be expensive to be effective. Both companies said their training programs and follow-up activities—which were aimed at workers whose job duties were changing—led to improved productivity, cost savings, higher morale and better communication between trainees and their bosses. One of the companies even attributed a decline in union grievances to its training activities, saying the employees who participated in the program became better managers.”

Those five points are relatively easy to achieve, but employee and management desire has to play a part.

Writing anything down gives it more impact–especially for those that learn by doing more than listening. Writing down how one would apply the training helps commit the idea in a way that is different from memorizing; actors often write down lines as a way of “embedding” the ideas, emotions, and actions contained in those words. Don’t ask me why, but it works.

For me, I play it out mentally if I can’t walk the part. I put myself in the mindset for a moment, visualing how these words fit in the “new” me. It can be the same for a trainee, just a different learning technique. For the worker or trainee, writing down or incorporating what the training has provided into written form does much the same thing. It embeds the training guidance into what is already present in his or her perception of operational knowledge and “memories.”

Measuring results.

We’ve already looked at why a test or training evaluation will not necessarily measure the results of how the worker will be able to apply that training. Here’s an idea I like. Why not an interactive training session given later that seeks to do just that? By discussing and suggesting with peers, the application of the training becomes part of the work culture. Better yet, if it’s not already incorporated into the original training, ensure that a discussion or written exercise, development of a work plan includes practical application visualization as part of it. It may still be necessary to have a follow-up, but the seed is planted. Incorporate the training into the performance evaluation process–a little cold perhaps, but necessary, and the development of a new work plan with the modifications attributed to the training reinforce the importance of the result.

It’s still people-to-people.

Martin’s points have a similar bent, but one that seems to work because it is people-to-people. Each point validates the positive nature of the training, allowing the employee to seek additional information and explanation from other sources. It also places the burden of making mental changes more in the hands of the person who can make it happen: the employee.

I can remember taking a job and being given a book, “This is your Bible. This tells you everything you need to know.” It was my key reference book; the how-to would be up to me. That was the extent of my training. I sought out more information from others, peers, supervisors and other sources to make that “Bible” apply to the job I had to do. It was the equivalent of training and knowing I had to do more to make it work. If trainees come to us with the same goal, perhaps all this would not be necessary.

In training, some employees come expecting to be spoon-fed the information they need–which they get sometimes, depending on the trainer; or they receive lots of interactive activities, which keep them interested in the training information being disseminated. Notice I didn’t say anything about practical training application. Perhaps, when we are talking training development we also add a section of applying this training to the specific job as it pertains to the training needs of the employees. If we are already doing this, maybe we need to be more specific. If individual treatment (coaching or training) is necessary, make plans for that to occur immediately or at a minimum, as soon as possible after training.

Training should include a visualization of how it will fit into, not only the company scheme, but into the worker’s training needs.

This fits in well with another article I wrote called, The Training Needs Assessment Disconnect–a look the process as perceived by the employee. As trainers, we are all concerned that what we say has impact, that it is remembered and is a valuable addition in the work place. We need to remain cognizant that we look at both company and individual needs if we are to have the desired training results. The company is the client, but it will be a much happier client if we achieve results. I try to stay positive in my outlook that employees only want what’s best, but we have to be realistic, they and their families come first when it’s time to crunch. Make the training a success-building arrangement, one that works for both the company and employee–and I don’t think we can go wrong.

For information on how to conduct a needs assessment, check out this link: http://www.dirjournal.com/guides/how-to-conduct-a-training-needs-analysis/

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Keep it simple, keep it basic, remember the people, and the Cave Man way of training. Surviving and thriving is for everyone. Check out more of my Cave Man here, or other perspectives on my website. Please check out my new book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.

Work may be black and white in nature, but it’s not life. I’ve been working a long time for other people so I have a lot of experience as the employee. In time, I became a trainer and a supervisor–and now a communicator and coach. It’s different in the military in some ways, but that’s another story. You can imagine that with over 40 years of working, and not in the same jobs or same types of jobs, that I arrived at my present perception of reality. That perception evolved over the years; my job situations changed and so did I. It is also how all others who worked before, arrive where they do in their perceptions of working life.

Most people’s perceptions of work life or reality is pretty basic, but most can’t compare in the diversity of life’s experiences through which they arrived at those perceptions. Some peoples lives are easy and simple; some difficult and complex; some lucky, some not; some functional, some dysfunctional; but all of these lives co-exist in our classroom. Granted, we all have our problems we had to deal with in life; they all seem large to us then, and we found solutions. Our life experiences and our dreams define us today.

Education itself is a whole other matter; it helps form our attitudes as well. Forget about education at the moment, this is just about the work experiences.

Before you take a look at the typical training classroom, understand, the make-up of your classroom is hardly typical. A simple example: I teach a class in a center city urban environment and another in the suburbs. In some ways my students are the same but different. Most of you would agree without question.

But let’s go deeper. It is with a certain amount of pride that I tell you part of my story. As trainers, training developers and managers, we need to motivate our employees, make them feel part of a team, the company family. We need to inspire them to make their own greatness in doing so to make the company great. We want them to achieve all manner of success.

You can argue a company can only do so much or should only focus on the business–that there’s not room for sentimentality. Tell that to someone who needs a job desperately. Bet they’d work their butts off for a chance to succeed. “These kinds of employees have too many problems.” It’s infuriating just writing those words. However, unless the company has to take them per government regulations in some cases…

Business can be cold and that’s part of the problem, and government tells them when they are being unfair or prejudicial. Remember those companies that take care of their employees tend to even profit more because the general public is made up of those same people.

As a trainer or trainee, or as a manager, I can’t help but bring my personal experience with me to the classroom; it is part of who I am and came to be. There are others in the classroom like me, and I know there are others who have had a harder life, but we are all survivors. We have dreams to not only achieve a certain amount of normalcy but to make a better life. So, I know my job. I know what I need to do. Address the dreams.

At 15 I had left home for reasons we don’t need to address now and was on my own. I still wanted to go to school, but I needed to support myself, too. After lying about my age to get a job, I worked eight-hour shifts in food service then, when for minimum wage most supervisors have preconceived notions of your work performance without even looking. They want the least amount of interaction with you and the most amount of interaction with the accounting books. I learned work could be a ruthless place and few people were given opportunities to move ahead unless the boss liked you without knowing you. It mattered what high school you went to. Work performance is not at issue; there are other workers by the dozen. I survived.

My last job while in high school was the hardest, working in a restaurant as a fry cook until 2:00 a.m and still having to get up to go to school by 7:45 a.m. I was always late for school and always sent to detention where I did most of my homework. Parents were unavailable for consultation, but my grades were okay, so the school didn’t really care. Quite frankly, I think the school knew I was on my own, but I was stable enough and in no real trouble at school so it wasn’t the school’s problem. It’s a little different now.

At work, which started shortly after school, I used my dinner break to eat as much as I could hold because it may be my only meal of the day, and to finish any homework I hadn’t finished in school. Down times didn’t exist at work and my employer wouldn’t have said, “Why don’t you take some time to work on some school work until we get busy.” There was always busy work. Work is work. No complaints. My first experiences are the ones I start with, knowing how they could have been made better.

Training always seems cut and dry, boring and examples company-centered. Seems that’s the way it has to be. Trainers can crank up the entertainment factor a notch, depending on the trainer. Perhaps, the important part of training is to remember a basic rule of teaching (and training), you are teaching students or training employees (people) and not subjects.

• Help make those subjects fit in the lives of those you instruct.
• Help them see how it is important to them.
• Help them see how it all fits into their dreams–even if this job is a stepping-stone to another.

Acknowledging experience and another’s dreams will win you fans–champions of your causes even, and listeners who will apply that knowledge to the jobs at hand. Important training mission accomplished.

I started to write an article on training assessments, before, during and after training. There seems to be a lot of interest in that topic, but I found myself focusing on one of the most important aspects of training, and that is who is receiving it and how we make the best impression. Hence: this article. Next time I promise an article on training assessments. Now that we’ve looked at the employees, we’ll look at the company and what it needs. It just may very well be people with dreams to get the job done.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

As always my views are my own and influenced by who I am (who I became) and I am hoping to help you shape your dreams in the days ahead. Check out my website for more information on my philosophy and dreams as well as my words. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy training.

Can we train every employee to be CEO one day? Of course, it would be a rare employee that ends in that lofty position, but shouldn’t it be possible?

The idea isn’t to convince workers that is their career path, but to let them feel a part of the entire operation in a way that makes them see value in the whole. Bit by bit they learn everything there is to know about the business. Certainly not in detail but in enough for workers to realize the importance of everyone who works there.

An extremely fantastic idea, I admit, but I think there are companies out there who do that do more than say their employees are sales associates and sales managers–a euphemism for sales person in most cases. There are companies that believe their people are the most important resource they have–as important as the product they produce–an idea that appeals to the romantic young.

It may be a solution to young passionate workers losing that passion. We find the older set takes over the company and keeps things exactly as they are. The younger set becomes disillusioned and leaves. Those young workers who are leaving are most likely more qualified and better educated than ever because jobs are hard to find. So, why drive them away?

It’s the economy, plain and simple. One colleague says, “…in 2007 we tried hiring a Community Development Planner entry level. We received 15 applications and had to hire a fresh out of school candidate. This year same job 200+ applications many well established in the field. Same with Civil Engineers and if we have a job that pays $40,000/year we get dozens of Juris Doctorate candidates who just can’t find work in their chose field. The few lucky college grads who get their dream job right off probably do stay… We have MBA grads doing entry level clerical work…and let’s face it filing sucks.”

It’s not re-training we need. It seems the economy is driving people to take jobs for which they are more than qualified. You can’t change the job to suit, but you can maintain the positive attitude of that the person by not making the job the dreary substitute they fear, but rather the dream job they could have some day. How do you do that?

A study reported in the Federal Times in an article titled quite simply enough, “Study: Younger Feds Happier at Work Than Older Feds.” There seems to be much truth to that, but why would it be just the Feds? I thinks that’s true with most companies–at least those we’d envision a career.

Let’s go way out and say, in general, most younger workers are happy at the start of employment. There is a honeymoon phase, then reality of the workplace; over time the worker becomes disillusioned. Most would agree that can happen anywhere and not just the Federal government. I’ve heard there are a few places where workers are happy for life, but maybe that’s an exaggeration.

If there are these “dream” jobs, then there is a solution to the problem.

If you look an organization where anyone you talk to seems to have been so happy the entire time they worked there, you’ll find it most likely had to do with the company’s exemplary training programs. They kept training these employees, starting with the young people from Day One for newer and better things. As long as they did, these employees were extremely happy with the company. They were even more pleased when the company established a “listening post” and took their needs seriously. Granted this can happen easier in people driven companies–those that derive their income from how their people interact with others as opposed to a specific product. Identifying with the company itself becomes a positive, even to outsiders.

To say you worked for Ben and Jerry’s, Disney, Pixar (owned by Disney now), or another company with positive name recognition is rewarding enough; it doesn’t matter what job you had. Everyone will think you’re so lucky to have been working in a place that cares about people. They are a business like anything else and they regard the bottom line as seriously as the next guy. To outsiders, it is just a public relations ploy, but from I have heard from talking to actual employees, these are dream jobs for precisely the reasons I have named. The difference is that these companies seem to revere the enthusiasm of youth and transfer it to their product. In fact, the company standards are quite exacting and demanding–so it’s not easy to work for them, quote the old timers. “But it’s worth it,” they add.

The more complicated question is how do we make it last longer? We need to look at what affirms and rewards passion and fresh ideas. Providing the training necessary for an employee to develop is an important part of that. Young workers in these dream companies are trained early and continually trained to provide a consistent product or service. It’s not a money thing either. These workers are not extremely well-paid, but they are treated like family. The level of training they have had is even adorning the clothes they wear. Buttons, badges and patches proudly proclaiming their level of expertise. So, training is important.

Young people as a rule are a more positive lot. They aren’t as cynical and dispassionate as their older peers, but that is something we face with the innocence of the young. Children, regardless of their lot in life, try to be happy regardless of circumstances–even the most dire. Ready with smiles for anyone who affirms that they have done something right, or even exist. Should it be any different with young workers. For those of us who have been around awhile, reality makes us more careful and thoughtful, which can be thought of as unresponsive to change and new ideas. We should smile at them more and let them know their passion is appreciated and their ideas important–and mean it. We worry about losing our jobs to our youth, but that is exactly what we want. We train when we need to train, sometimes when we need to motivate, but most often when we want productivity to go up.

Our minds seem to narrow in response to age unless we keep exercising our willingness to see the positive attributes of the new. I remember being passionate about my job, my work and it was exciting. I was doing something worthwhile. I had taken the job originally as a “roof” job–something to keep a roof over my head while I wrote the Great American novel, but I fell in love with my work. In the end before retirement, I felt the same way about my work, but I had tired of my passionate responses falling on deaf ears because someone didn’t want to bother or the system made it impossible.

This is why constant training to look at the new is important–like training every employee it be CEO is not ridiculous; it’s already being done. It’s more a matter of attitude with amazing results than intensive training. And, mentoring, a form of training, and leadership, an example of training well done is so important. Mentoring to give them the courage to continue on the path. Leadership all along the way to learn how to direct that passion and push the new ideas to a positive conclusion–and the realization being theirs (the young) if something doesn’t work.

This commentary started as a look at why young people are happier in their jobs, but somehow we have to look at keeping that passion and enthusiasm alive. It is my opinion that it is possible and that it is happening because some company is training every person who works for them as if that person could be CEO. I know I’d like to be treated like that. It’s only fair. Again, these are my ideas and you are free to disagree via comment here, on my website (the seminar detail page includes some new ballpark pricing for those who are interested), and e-mail.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development. Happy Training.

Life, choices, opportunity, and success. It all affects our work life to be. The choices we are able to make in terms of education and training, as well as our personal and professional development make us who we are. Some of us are workers, trainees, students, teachers, trainees, managers, leaders, but how did we all get there and how do we manage our future. That is the crux of the issue I want to discuss.

This is a follow-up to my previous article on Hybrid Education. Even though my focus is from a training perspective, I consider myself an educator and trainer as well as a communicator. I just reviewed a play by Willy Russell called Blood Brothers. It was a good play–an unusual musical actually that talks about what happens when twin boys are separated at birth and go on to live very different but supposedly separate lives.

“One is given away and one is kept,” in more ways than one. The play is also about class struggle or put another way obstructing the class system. One boy is offered the benefits of a good education and a sheltered home life. While he has the benefits of such, he learns little of real life except through others, while his brother learns life the hard way–through experience. Blood can’t overcome the differences, and the situation for the brothers who do meet unaware they are related and become friends–blood brothers at age seven–ends in tragedy at 25.

Enough theatre. It is all about nurture versus nature. Or is it? At one time, just because you were of noble birth, you would automatically be considered a success in life; the world would fall at your feet. Today that is not the case, but close.

My life, while not as dramatic as the lives represented in the play, affected how I became what I am. It could have gone another way, but I was lucky. Many of the friends I grew up with never went to college or never finished; their lives are different but not necessarily better or worse. I learned that being common only depends on my definition of it and how I feel about it–whether I regard it at all. Perhaps that’s very American, but as everyone says at one time or another: “if I only knew what I know now.” Today we are older and wiser, hopefully.

I’m going to tell a story–a short one I hope–to give some perspective to my own situation. I never went to Yale or Harvard, or Wharton, or the United States Military Academy (as a student), or even attended a private school for college prep. My parents had no money and plenty of dysfunctional issues. We all have issues, but that’s life. You can’t help who your parents are, and I am not ashamed. We may not have made much money, but they made me. I survived and learned, and I will continue learning.

Are you still with me? What does this have to do with training? A lot on the audience analysis side and a little on a very basic scale of what you need to do the job: the ABCs, Six Things You Need to Know, Tips, Tips, Tips, etc.

Education is a wonderful thing, but it all comes with catches–all of it. I was a poor kid with a lot of insecurity. I had no confidence to make it on my own anywhere. I hadn’t been anywhere. I had no support system. My life was based on what I knew at the time and only what I knew. I got lucky in high school. Grades were okay–not great; I didn’t care. Why should I? That’s what life as I knew it taught me. Later, I would discover I needed it, but four years after my enlistment in the Marines–my security blanket.

Cost is a factor for most of us. Economic social disadvantages or advantages can determine where we are able to go to school and when. In fact, I was lucky to go to college at all.

I happened to like acting and won the Best Supporting Actor award in high school, which led to a scholarship/fee waiver at the local four-year state institution wanting to develop a theatre department. It was timing. I wasn’t ready. I didn’t want to be an actor. I didn’t know anything about going to college. I had had no opportunity to learn and no reasonable chance to have the family support to go; I lied about my age and worked through high school. It was all on me to survive. I was in no position to take risks. I took a few classes and found the courses relatively easy, but I quit and joined the Marines. Four years later, after taking the College-Level Equivalency Program or CLEP test and discovering I had learned some things growing up after all, I went back to school thirty semester credits ahead with a definite exuberance for education and made straight “A”s. If I had only known the advantages I missed, had I known about student loans, and had someplace to turn for support, I “coulda been a contender.”

I was good enough as a psychology graduate student to receive a Fullbright Scholarship to the University of Sidney, but I was too afraid of survival in a totally foreign environment to accept it. Sure, people tell me now that was my ticket, but then? Instead I went back to a Midwestern university where I felt secure, missing out on all the opportunities of later success, just based on the fact I finished my education via the Fullbright. Earlier, unknown to me, the English department had put my name in to Iowa State where they have a famous writing program for a scholarship, which I was awarded, as well as a teaching assistant position. I didn’t take it–perhaps ironically because I was planning on graduate school in bio-psychology. After graduating with a Bachelors and taking graduate courses in psychology at a local university, I went into the Air Force for the security–this time at least going to officer training school.

That’s not the end of the irony. Because I was educated at a large Midwestern University and had enough undergraduate hours in English, I was offered an opportunity to teach at the United States Air Force Academy, and the great thing for me: the Air Force would pay for my graduate education to do it. It was an opportunity I could afford to take. I had the security of the military–books and tuition paid for and I was paid to go to school. I chose the University of Missouri–if anyone cares–so I could visit my daughter who lived in the area, but personal issues made that a problem. It was close to home and secure even though I had the security of the military service. Still, it was a good school. According to the Air Force, I could have chosen any school where I could gain entrance, including Ivy League schools if I had wanted to.

We all know about the publish or perish policy at most big or prestigious universities. Got to keep the alumni dollars rolling in. At regular institutions, there is an expectancy of behavior for student and faculty alike. I didn’t grow up knowing any of this. I didn’t know some professors were more equal than others. I had assumed our job was to teach, and at the Air Force Academy we sometimes train. It is perhaps ironic that I was the cadre commander for the Summer Survival Camp since I was learning about survival everyday. It seems I was late for everything. Late for education. Late to develop socially. I could date during high school–not real dates. I could get girls, but couldn’t keep relationships. I didn’t know how to behave until I saw others do it right. This happens in Blood Brothers, too. The point is that it is important to know how to talk to people for them to understand you and for you to understand them. It takes time. Now, I am a consummate observer of behavior. I also have a graduate degree in psychology and a dual interdisciplinary degree in performance criticism . It works–especially in training and communication. Sending and receiving information and interpreting it is learned.

This is not to dig at the fine service institution or any of them. All schools have a structure not unlike any organization. Education prestige focuses more on the past than the future. Professors and instructors are not promoted on merit unless merit is publishing a paper that gives the institution a boost. It is not always the best leader or teacher who runs a department, but the one with the best credentials and tenure. All based on the past.

The lesson here is not to focus on the past; it’s not efficient. Although a case could be made for competence due to the quality of education attained a the prestigious institution, but that could be argued based on the results demonstrated by students at the end of the education or training program.

Sometimes, it is a bit ridiculous. Rules make it difficult, but humans pull through anyway. At the USAF Academy, I was forced to make sure my students followed the bell curve, regardless of the fact that most of my students came from the top 5 percent of their high school classes. It was presumed the bell curve was to be expected, but teachers made the most of it by modifying the bell to suit in most cases I hope. Most teachers gave the bulk of the students a “C” range, a few in “B” range, and very few “A”s. Too many would be noticed. The students earned their grades–although some were quite a bit taken aback by their loss of academic prowess since high school. Some even flunked out, more because of attitude than anything. Students who did well, did well in the Air Force or found themselves in exclusive graduate programs. I found it interesting that in spite of science, teachers found a way to look at individuals and adapt. You just didn’t talk about it officially, or you could lose your job.

Working at a proprietary school later, I was pressured to give undeserved grades, which I wouldn’t do–but I did work harder and do extra work with these students to make it happen. Student financing rather than alumni was a motivator. Management didn’t pay me any more, but the students were served. I’d do it again because the cause was worthy. I did hate that the school was unaccredited and I had several students capable of real “university” work. All along I found I was learning character–especially as I watched these students struggle to get ahead of socio- economic barriers they faced that I had, too. I realized how lucky I was, and thus the experience became a character builder for me.

Life comes in many packages and all influence who we become. For some of us, the struggle for success takes longer because we have more learn the hard way. But as in Blood Brothers, the play, one brother becomes a “waste” on the street so hard is his struggle–most based on ignorance, while the other steeped in quality of life becomes an innocent in the ways of the world. Both needed to be taught but circumstances of class and social economics prevented it. Is it any different today as you look at members of your audience. They come from all over. They are are at different places in learning about life, their opportunities, their futures. Don’t put them down. Raise their hopes and provide them the tools to get to the next level. Everyone it seems needs help and guidance. Early guidance is best. The right kind, of course, but sometimes it isn’t readily available.

The next time as a trainer you look at your audience and do the appropriate analysis to know them, know also that this is why socio-economic characteristics are part of the program. It means more than the obvious lack of money and living in the wrong neighborhood. What if you were pampered all your life and were ignorant of reality? We learn from life, the world and institutions. Wouldn’t it be nice if we all agreed to help each other? Reality can be as selfish as individuals. Only individuals know better.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

My opinion is my opinion. I hope I haven’t offended anyone. My website is now http://actingsmarts-jackshaw.com. My focus is training and communication. I coach and train. For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development.

Most educators and trainers alike see the advantages of face-to-face education and training over online programs. The value of face-to-face education or training may be a given, but good things are coming, believe it or not, from hybrid or condensed programs. It seems logical for several reasons. I may be going off topic here venturing into the world of education; however, that wouldn’t be unheard of and there is precedent and application to training today.

Like most everyone in academia or in training and development, I used to believe there are far more disadvantages to online programs than face-to-face education, coaching or training in a classroom. In all fairness, the online trainers may want to comment on this post and I would appreciate any stats you have the would prove me wrong in my assessment of face-to-face learning, or show the increasing numbers of online participants.

Like it or not, online is here to stay. It’s reputation, deserved or not at this point, was ruined for a time, and today is at least hampered by the mere existence of the diploma mills. Ironically, there is probably no connection at all, but the mere fact a school didn’t have a physical campus made it suspect. I can only assume there are more diploma mills than there used to be because of the Internet; however, there are plenty of good online programs out there, if that is what you need. And, many hybrid programs these days are coming from traditional universities seeing the advantage of hybrid education as well as making up the losses by a downturn in student enrollments–therefore tuition payments, as well as corporate universities and universities that specialize in these kinds of programs.

It is argued that online programs lack discipline and allow the student too much freedom in “attending” to study. Let’s not talk about “party schools” or “frat parties” or the fact some students just don’t have to study as hard as others–period. Some online schools are credible in that they do demand the students make real attempts at learning. There’s constant evaluation. Remember classes that had a mid-term and a final, or just a paper at the end to prove you learned what you were supposed to? Those kinds of courses can be found at any major institution (at least in America).

While you shouldn’t expect to transfer credits automatically from an online or online hybrid program, the schools I’ve mentioned here are all accredited and credits should transfer. Check first, if that’s important to you. There may still be perceived disadvantages to online programs (as there are to all programs I should add), but some subjects lend themselves to that treatment better than others. Some educators will say the lack of a collegiate environment and personal contact is a distinct disadvantage. This may be true. Socialization, especially, among colleagues to be is important, but isn’t any education important on its own sake? I moved out of my college dorm because it was too social.

All things being equal, there are advantages and disadvantages to the traditional schools as well–some make sense and some don’t. So online education is not traditional; it doesn’t have some of the advantages or disadvantages of traditional education either. Just because a GED is not a high school diploma, it is better than no diploma at all.

Cost is a factor for most of us. Economic social disadvantages or advantages can determine where we are able to go to school and when. In fact, I was lucky to go to college at all.

I had the disadvantage of going to big Midwestern school, which is fine in the midwest for the most part; but I moved away. It’s all in your perspective, isn’t it? (It didn’t matter when I joined the Air Force.) Like other state schools, Mizzou tended to have strong alums that supported the local students, but their companies wouldn’t turn their nose up at an Ivy-leaguer. Ivy league and other prestigious institutions still get you in the door of the corporations that will ultimately pay the big bucks, get you noticed in applying for government and education jobs, and, if you are political, the appointment over someone from a lesser institution–all things being equal.

Ironically for me, because I went to a midwestern school, I met the USAF Academy‘s desire to have a diverse faculty. After the Air Force paid my way for a graduate education, I taught English, speech and theatre. There are advantages and disadvantages to attending and teaching there, too, but that’s for another article. Just to give you the flavor: PhD versus Masters, where you went to school (that Ivy League thing again), tenured or non-tenured, published or not, and a few you don’t see at other institutions: Regular or Reserve Commission, Academy grad or not, pilot or not. That’s just from an instructor perspective. There seems no escaping it.

Sometimes we have no choice. The money or family support isn’t there. We have to work and find a way. Online programs are what they are. As with anything, do your best and hope for the best. But if you have an opportunity to take classes (even night classes at an institution of some note) will give you an advantage in the end.

All this probably makes you think I’m going to unload on online programs like Capella University, but I’m not. I still believe (and there is evidence) that face-to-face works best. Hybrid programs like at DeVry University, Phoenix University, and even well-known major universities like the University of Houston make the most of technology and the student population that needs the flexibility the programs offer. I was hired to teach a hybrid course in public speaking. I can tell you that my interview teaching a hybrid online class was more rigorous than others. I had to be technologically and subject-matter proficient. Fortunately I host and write a blog on training and development as well as other blogs on literary and theatrical criticism. That meant I could talk to students online in a natural way.

Online schools simply are not regarded well unless you already have a job and the advanced degree can fill the square employers need to promote you. Don’t assume it’s a panacea or a guarantee of success. I helped my admin assistant who wanted to be promoted after she got her bachelors degree part-time, and she took another government job–a GS-5/7/9 management track position unlike an administrative track (she was on the same grade sequence) one that she already had–and lasted a week. I don’t think it was the fact that she had a degree that she had earned a “non-traditional” way, but that she felt it entitled her. She no longer wanted to be an admin assistant once she had the degree, but she wasn’t ready for the new job either just because she had it.

However, in this economy, hybrid classes are getting more popular, and I hope gaining more acceptance. At least here you have the benefit of in-class work to do those face-to-face things important in teaching. Also, the technology-based trends are taking hold in all schools, elementary to university, and so the stigma is not so great. I should point out that not all online programs that have a classroom period at the beginning and end of the term can rightly be called a true hybrid online program. They start with people and face-to-face and end that way, but along the way, there is still the notion that face-to-face learning is best, and I think it better when it is repeated more than twice.

As for online schools that offer graduate programs being more acceptable, that is entirely possible. But I think among those who really care, where it matters most–in academia, in science, in the arts it’s laughable to them. It looks nice on letterhead and may bring a few customers in like many letters following a name. CPA, CSA, LLC, ESQ are a few letters that come to mind as well as letters signifying certification based on having attended a training course touted as professional. Mine would be: MA, MA, MSP… Really? But we do it.

It’s all out there as a means of establishing credibility. Do I trust an MBA from Wharton over an MBA from Phoenix University (online)? Maybe. An online PhD versus one from any accredited State University or a more prestigious higher learning institution? I would accept it because it shows tremendous work regardless; however, that doesn’t mean the others are more widely accepted at first glance. If you have an online graduate degree, I have to look to see if I recognize the name. If I don’t, I have to look it up. If I have to look it up when I have candidates for a position with ones I don’t have to look up… I think you get the gist.

A final word. Although we have different definitions for training and education, there are some gray areas, areas that overlap, areas that give rise to new techniques and learning. How we learn, we took from education…or did we? What we do know is that it is evolving process. As I always say, my ideas are my own with the help of mental stimulation offered by others. Check out my website for more of What I Say. I know I’m not always right, but I try to be honest and fair. Feel free to comment, either here or on my site. Happy training (and educating). For a look at the human side of training from my Cave Man perspective, please check out my book, The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.